VIJAYEE SINGH AND ORS. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

VIJAYEE SINGH AND ORS. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

The appellants (accused Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 6) were entitled to the right of private defence but exceeded this right by intentionally shooting the deceased; thus, their offence is punishable under Section 304 Part I IPC, not Section 302/149 IPC; the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment is set aside and replaced by rigorous imprisonment for ten years under Section 304 Part I read with Section 34 IPC.

Parties
Appellants: Vijayee Singh and Ors.; Respondent: State of Uttar Pradesh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 April 1990
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeals Against Conviction and Acquittal
Outcome
Appeals by convicted accused partly allowed; conviction for Section 302/149 IPC and sentence of life imprisonment set aside; conviction under Section 304 Part I/34 IPC upheld with sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment; appeals by State against acquittals dismissed.
Legal Topics
Right of Private Defence, Burden of Proof, Section 105 Evidence Act, Section 148 IPC, Section 302 IPC, Section 149 IPC, Section 304 Part I IPC, Section 34 IPC, Section 307 IPC
Criminal Law Evidence Right of Private Defence Burden of Proof Section 105 Evidence Act Section 148 IPC Section 302 IPC Section 149 IPC +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vijayee Singh and Ors.

Appellants

State of Uttar Pradesh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeals Against Conviction and Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants were entitled to the right of private defence and whether they exceeded the same.
  2. 2 Whether the burden of proof under Section 105 of the Evidence Act was satisfied by the accused.
  3. 3 Whether the conviction under Section 302/149 IPC and sentence of life imprisonment was correct or should be reduced to Section 304 Part I IPC.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants (accused Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 6) were entitled to the right of private defence but exceeded this right by intentionally shooting the deceased; thus, their offence is punishable under Section 304 Part I IPC, not Section 302/149 IPC; the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment is set aside and replaced by rigorous imprisonment for ten years under Section 304 Part I read with Section 34 IPC.

Court Disposition

Appeals by convicted accused partly allowed; conviction for Section 302/149 IPC and sentence of life imprisonment set aside; conviction under Section 304 Part I/34 IPC upheld with sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment; appeals by State against acquittals dismissed.

Orders

  • Conviction of appellants under Section 302/149 IPC and life imprisonment set aside.
  • Appellants convicted under Section 304 Part I read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment each.